can you pick up the project as far as a front end?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kafka's Daytime" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "General discussions on all topics relating to the use of Mac OS X by
theblind" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: iTunes' Inaccessibility and VoiceOver
On Sep 13, 2006, at 2:47 PM, Alastair Campbell wrote:
Joe mentioned that iTunes is built differently because they maintain it
on both OSX and Windows. I use it on both, it appears pretty much
identical.
This is an incidental clarification, but I meant to (and perhaps didn't,
or at least nor eloquently) distinguish between apps developed and
maintained for more than one platform (like iTunes) vs. apps that are
maintained for Mac OS X only i.e. the pertinent comparison is not between
iTunes Windows + Mac but iTunes and other apps that aren't deployed on
platforms other than Mac OS X.
However, that doesn't bode well for it being re-built from the ground
up, as Apple would then have to maintain two versions - probably not
economical.
Ah, the truth might be a little muddier...perhaps fortunately for those
of us who want to see iTunes fully accessible on Mac OS X.
1. It may not be necessary (or even desirable) to re-build the
application from the ground up to ensure its accessibility on both
platforms.
2. The bulk of the underlying codebase might be maintained more or less
as is and the User Interface can be abstracted by a level or two
(speaking deliberately conceptually here) so that, perhaps, most of the
special-cases are maintained at the abstracted, UI level (with few or no
changes required in the lower level code). In short, there are quite a
few options in between cross-platform and inaccessible + cross-platform,
accessible and maintained expensively as separate applications.
3. The economics might not be so cut and dry, either. Apple has made some
pretty bold short term moves from time to time to help ensure better
things down the road. Even though we, quite justifiably, see iTunes
(in)accessibility as a major issue - it is only one in a number of such
major issues for which Apple will have to bite the bullet, as it were. I
think the long term economics might lead one to guess reasonably that
iTunes *will* eventually be fully accessible. How, when it will happen
and why it has happened yet is more difficult to hash out.
Two solutions come to mind:
1. Apple build a script or customisation into Voiceover to deal with
iTunes. I wouldn't know if that's possible, but it isn't how they have
generally approached things so far.
2. Someone (any programmer) could build an accessible widget for iTunes
(or adapt one that's there already).
Anyone tried building widgets? I'm not sure how much of the
functionality you could access via a widget, I assume play lists and
searches would be very difficult.
Ah, there was some good list conversation on this quite a while back. A
few of us bounced around the idea of building an application that would
provide an accessible front end to iTunes. This is most certainly doable.
I did some initial work back then but ended up shelving the idea since I
(wrongly) guessed that iTunes would be accessible by now. Travis also
fiddled with the idea, I believe, at least at the
reasearch/conceptual/thought experiment level. Sadly, he and his
insight/expertise are at least temporarily gone from the list.
I don't, personally, believe that Apple is going to build this access
into VoiceOver and, for the long term - though it would neatly satisfy a
short term need - perhaps that is not the best way to resolve the
problem. For the short term, it's probably best for a third party to
develop a stopgap solution...keeping in mind that ultimately this will
almost certainly be done the right way with iTunes directly accessible
via VoiceOver.
I guess. :)
Joe
Kind regards,
-Alastair
__________ NOD32 1.1754 (20060913) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
